Replies to post #447772 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[blackhawks]

Dems are for voter ID and or voter identity verification and not targeted voter suppression, the latter which is thinly veiled AND the preferred modus operandi for Covid.

The right has stop the steal on their wee brains, a discredited meme which will soon be cited as the grounds for charging criminal activity by Trump and his minions in the '20 election.

https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id

Introduction

A total of 35 states have laws requesting or requiring voters to show some form of identification at the polls. Forthcoming changes include:

During the November 2022 midterm elections, Nebraska became the 36th state to require voter ID when voters approved a citizen initiative requiring photo ID. This page will be updated to reflect the new requirement once the law’s details are available.

The remaining 15 states and D.C. use other methods to verify the identity of voters. Most frequently, other identifying information provided at the polling place, such as a signature, is checked against information on file. See NCSL’s?Voter Verification Without ID Documents.

Proponents argue increasing identification requirements can prevent in-person voter impersonation and increase public confidence in the election process. Opponents say there is little fraud of this kind, and the burden on voters unduly restricts the right to vote and imposes unnecessary costs and administrative burdens on elections administrators.

All voters, regardless of the type of verification required by the states, are subject to perjury charges if they vote under false pretenses. See "State-by-State In-Effect Voter ID Requirements" (Table 2 below) for citations and details on which IDs are accepted and what happens when a voter does not have ID.

[DesertDrifter]

I believe the repubs are for voter ID for citizens to vote— dems appear to be against it

That is because republicans prefer to restrict minority voting. Remember the reservation Sioux in South Dakota that live where there are no physical addresses so were denied the vote?

Minorities are disproportionally impacted by voter ID laws.
Minority voters are more likely to lack a necessary voter ID than those who are in the majority. Up to 25% of African-Americans in the United States who are of voting age lack the government-issued identification they need to vote. The same can be said for just 8% of people from Caucasian descent.

Considering the fact that many states exclude forms of identification in a discriminatory manner, the result tends to be a reduction in the voice of the minority in each election. Texas allows a concealed weapon permit for voting, but it will not accept a student ID card. North Carolina prohibited public assistance identification and state employee ID cards, which were disproportionally held by African-American voters until the laws were struck down. Even Wisconsin permitted an active-duty ID, but not one from the VA.

Voter ID laws are enforced in discriminatory ways as well.
Research from MIT and Caltech found that minority voters are questioned more frequently about their voter ID than white voters, even if the documentation they present is accurate and legal. The University of California at San Diego corroborated this research by analyzing certified votes across all states after the implementation of voter laws in several elections.

Their findings are clear. “Strict photo identification laws have a differentially negative impact on the turnout of Hispanics, Blacks, and mixed-race Americans in primaries and general elections,” was the conclusion of the research.

In-person fraud cases are exceptionally rare at the ballot box.
There are very few cases where someone misrepresents who they are when reporting to their local precinct to vote. Since 2000, there have only been 31 credible allegations of voter impersonation, which is the type of fraud that identification laws work to prevent. That number comes from a total of more than 1 billion total votes that were cast.

Many of the identified instances of “voter fraud” that ID law proponents discuss are honest mistakes more than an active attempt to change an election. Even these mistakes are infrequent. One of the most common problems that an election board faces is a failure by an individual to de-register as a voter when they move somewhere else.

Voter ID laws come with a high price tag for implementation.
The states which actively enforce their voter ID laws are spending millions of dollars to ensure that there is integrity with their elective processes. Indiana spent over $10 million between 2007-2010 to produce free identification cards that were suitable for their voter ID laws. Texas spent over $2 million on educational programs and outreach efforts to voters after passing their laws. Considering the actual fraud and its expense to correct is minimal, the price of a voter ID law is very high compared to the results which are possible from its presence.

It provides an ongoing cost that people or governments must continue to pay.
When you obtain a voter ID card, then it is valid only when your information does not change. Once you move to a different address, then there is a requirement to update the information on your identification. Many jurisdictions give you 30 days to take care of this issue. Failing to do so can limit your access to voting and other ID benefits.

These cards will eventually wear out over time, even if there is no expiration date given to them. The pictures can become dated. The ID could even be lost or stolen, which could increase the potential for identity theft.

There must be a reliable delivery system for ID cards.
When there is a voter ID law in place, then the election authority must have a reliable system of delivery for the necessary identification materials. When there are poor distribution methods or policies in place, then it effectively excludes people from voting even if they paid for their identification according to the policy. Although this ID can be an effective form of identification for someone who doesn’t have a physical address, it may not be useful if there is not an instant delivery system in place to use.

[fuagf]

Why Minority Voters Have a Lower Voter Turnout: An Analysis of Current Restrictions

"I believe the repubs are for voter ID for citizens to vote— dems appear to be against it
— I am sure if firing Comey was illegal Trump would be indicted by now"

The firing of Comey was not illegal. It was simply a break in tradition which eroded the traditional independence of the FBI.

June 25, 2020 HUMAN RIGHTS

by Sarina Vij

With ethnic and racial minority populations in the United States rising, there is a growing population of voices that remain unaccounted for. Though current legislation has been implemented to ensure fair and impartial voting access, there is too much leeway given to state governments in the voting system’s execution. As a result, restrictions in the election system have resulted in systematic discrimination toward minority populations, making them ineligible to vote.


Voter ID laws have underlying racial biases and prevent minorities from engaging in active democratic participation.

Voter ID laws have underlying racial biases and prevent minorities from engaging in active democratic participation. These requirements compel an individual to present his or her ID in order to cast a ballot on Election Day. Obtaining an ID can be costly and requires an individual’s birth certificate, which may be burdensome. Proponents advocate for the law under the guise of preventing voter fraud and ensuring that only voter-eligible citizens partake in elections; however, individuals who lack government-issued identification are more likely to be younger, less educated, and impoverished, and—most notably—nonwhite. An example of the inherent discrimination of voter ID laws can be found in the implementation of Georgia’s “exact match” system. This program requires an individual’s voting status to be suspended if the name on their driver’s license or Social Security records does not exactly match the name they inputted on their voter registration form. Of the 51,000 individuals that this law affected in 2018, 80 percent of them were African American. There is evidence that the “exact match” law played a role in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election, as African American candidate Stacey Abrams lost by approximately 55,000 votes.

It is also far more difficult for members of minority communities to be able to locate polling places on Election Day. Only 5 percent of white survey respondents reported that they had trouble finding polling locations, compared to 15 percent of African American and 14 percent of Hispanic respondents. When deciding where to place a polling station, election officials are required to assign each precinct a designated station based on factors such as population, accessibility, and location recognizability; locations may be changed at the officials’ discretion. Minorities have a lower voter turnout compared to whites and, in many cases, this has resulted in discriminatory polling place distributions. Disparities in polling places can also be the result of a change in the majority of election officials; minority populations are more likely to be left-leaning and, as a result, officials may shift polling locations to areas that are more representative of their political ideals.

Another major issue is the access to translated voting materials, which greatly decreases minority voter turnout. In communities that spoke little English, translated voting ballots were found to be responsible for increasing voter turnout by 11 points in the 2004 presidential election. In addition to increased voter turnout, the translated ballots allowed for higher voter engagement on all legislation. A concept known as “voter fall-off” incentivizes people who are at the polls to vote on more legislation and to answer more questions if the ballot is available in their native language. Often, ballot proposition measures are reading-intensive, making it difficult for minority language groups to fully comprehend and form an opinion on the proposed legislation. Current law (including Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act) requires all written voting materials to be made available in the language of the relevant minority group, but there are many restrictions. For instance, the number of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) citizens of voting age must exceed 10,000, must make up 5 percent of all eligible voters, or exceed 5 percent of all Native American reservation residents. Additionally, for any of the above groups, the illiteracy rate of the minority population must also be higher than the national illiteracy rate.

With the 2020 elections fast approaching, it is integral that we are encouraging active participation in our democracy and lifting restrictions that prevent minority populations from voting. Today, organizations and individuals are bringing cases of voter discrimination to court in an attempt to rewrite these wrongdoings. Furthermore, states such as New Jersey are reaching out to minority individuals via phone banks about election options, and they are also creating translated voting materials in Gujarati, Korean, Spanish, and English. Campaigns by public figures to encourage voter participation have been taking off, and the 2020 primary election is expected to have the highest voter turnout in decades. As Thomas Jefferson said, “We do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.”

Sarina Vij is a recent graduate of the University of California, Los Angeles.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/voting-in-2020/why-minority-voters-have-a-lower-voter-turnout/

[SoxFan]

How about an ID for gun registration